Scouts Inc. Fantasy O-Line rankings

[krazykat]

In parts:

 

I didn't mean to suggest that you want us to have a shi--y season. I was saying that if you are right, then we are in for a long season with a shi--y outcome. Sorry if it came across as directed. My bad. However, I want to again address a couple of points because I think this debate is important. First, I don't agree that the team is not trying to address the serious needs that have caused us to be so bad over the past eight seasons. We haven't had a solid DT corps since Pat Williams and Ted Washington were here. I think the team did a nice job addressing that. From what I have seen of Stroud, there is no problem with his ankle and he appears ready to go. As for McCargo, I would look at the reports from those same websites you cited, and on ESPN. McCargo missed almost his entire rookie season with a foot injury and didn't play, so essentially last year was his rookie season. I watched him closely as he was one of my favorite players in college and we must have seen different things. When he did get playing time he was frequently in the backfield disrupting plays, which is exactly what a DT is supposed to do. I have to check the stats again but I think he actually had more tackles for loss than any of our other DTs and that's saying a lot for a rookie and guy who you say has underperformed. He's only really played for one season and a lot of commentators have said he looks like he is growing into a player that was a worth a first round pick. He had 29 tackles last year, and 20 of those were solo. Only Kyle Williams, and every game starter had more total tackles at the DT position than McCargo, and more than half of his 48 tackles were assisted. McCargo also had 2.5 sacks from the 3 Tech DT position, which for what was essentially a rookie DT is pretty good, considering there was no push at the 1 from Triplett. I think we can disagree about McCargo from a statistical stand point. He hasn't been Marcus Stroud yet, but I think he has shown a lot of promise, and with Stroud next him at the 1-Tech this season, I do see a lot of improvement from him from the outset.

 

We have mostly had "long and shi--y seasons" for a while now with any hopes being of the white-knuckle variety and always directly hinged to how bad our competition is. Regardless, we cannot ccntrol that so one way or another we're just along for the ride. No problem however and I appreciate the clarification.

 

As to the team "trying to address the needs," I believe it has tried, I just believe that it has people in key positions that are inept, ignorant, just not very bright, or some combination of those things. Otherwise our drafts would have produced a lot more than just a continual revolving door of hopes that keeps flipping around every third year with hardly any players from more than three or four drafts ago still on the team and no impact ones. Not to mention that fact that we really don't have any impact players Lynch's and Stroud's seasons pending. I mean when your biggest impact players by a long shot are your P and KR, WTF does that say?

 

I mean honestly, those two, Moorman and McGee, are collectively the team's MVP now since they've been with us almost.

 

You talk about the team having done a nice job of addressing the DT position; First of all, let's not talk about Stroud since we don't know how he will play this year. It's not unwise to think that he may not be the player he was. He's always been tops IMO, but he's got injury issue resolutions and we don't know to what extents his steroid use factored in.

 

Otherwise, allow me to recount for your the efforts of the team to address our DT situation since Pat Williams and Ted Washington left in '05 and '01 respectively; Sam Adams whom the team overpaid for and who provided spotty and inconsistent play; Ron Edwards 3rd Round '01; Justin Bannan 5th round '02; Lavale Sape 6th Round '03; Tim "High Motor" Andersen 3rd Round '04; John "Trade Up" McCargo 1st Round '06; Kyle Williams 5th Round '06. The jury's very much out on McCargo with this pretty much being the year that he needs to be able to pin down a starting spot and show that he's capable of being an every down DT like Stroud if trading up into the 1st is to be justified. Otherwise the decision to trade up hasn't been in two seasons now, and 1st rounders are expected to start, at least DL players, immediately. You don't draft them as depth. Well, I suppose the Bills do.

 

Otherwise, let me ask you openly, which of those moves in seven offseasons addressing the DT spot have been very good decisions? Can you name one free agent brought on board to play DT that did it well during that time?

 

Otherwise, so what, eight seasons after you and I agree we had issues, we finally bring in Stroud and this is good management as you see it?

 

Also, you talk about McCargo disrupting plays, I think you've been reading Chris Brown and the Bills' stuff too much. He's been incredibly inconsistent, has hardly any sacks to show for all that effort, and it's not as if teams must "plan for him" making sacks difficult. He also hasn't even been able to hold down a starting spot. So something's not adding up here. He is definitely not an impact player.

 

See, one of the things that I've noticed is that fans often see one or a few plays by a player and in their mind that becomes the standard and norm for what that player brings. Sure, McCargo, just like just about every other player in the NFL has his moments, but they're rare. You can't take Edwards' Miami game, or McCargo's Miami game and make them the standard. Meanwhile, he has what, 2.5 sacks last year and one of them vs. Denver fell right into his lap. After that he had 1.5 in the final game of the season. He isn't a great run stuffer or our run D wouldn't be so bad. You mention TFL but he hardly had any tackles for a DT to begin with. I don't want to get off on McCargo, but look at the big picture and reconsider your position.

 

Either way, this is McCargo's 3rd season, he's not coming off a rookie season, and in looking at the big picture of our DTs since TW and PW left, if we had done a good job for seven seasons then we wouldn't have needed to go get Stroud this offseason. Plain and simple.

 

 

As for Trent Edwards, we will continue to disagree. However, even for all of the problems you cited, I would point you to an article today on NFL.com by Vic Carrucio at the following link. http://www.nfl.com/news/story;jsessionid=0...mp;confirm=true. Based on the article, and again of course you have to take it for what it is worth, it sounds to me like Edwards knew that he was going to have a bad year last year from a statistical stand point going in, something that perhaps fans were not expecting. Judging by the interviews he has had, including the one for this article he is talking the talk of a team leader, but also walking the walk. He is taking extra time to work with the WRs to get those timing routes down. He is traveling to FL and AZ to work with Evans and Robert Royal on passing, even when camp is out. The guy is trying to make an effort to get "massively better" as you put it. The fact is that when you look at Peyton Manning's rookie numbers, or Eli Manning's rookie numbers, or pretty much any rookie QB's numbers, they almost never look like they are going to lead to anything better. That's because they are rookies. You are right, that many times those numbers never improve. More often than not, unfortunately. But from what I can see he has shown the two most important characteristics in an NFL quarterback. He is showing that he is willing to put in the time required to get better and perform in this league, and he has shown the poise and composure necessary when making decisions on the field. You may disagree, but looking at the performances of Rookie QBs over the course of even the last fifteen years, I'd say there was one, Big Ben, that was good, and he hasn't performed nearly as well since then. The other starters in this league all had relatively putrid rookie seasons, but they put in the work and they improved to be average or better starting QBs. I don't think one can judge whether Edwards will be a good QB or not after his rookie season. Let's see how he performs this year before trying to make a judgement call.

 

If we both had a dollar for every player that came into the NFL that "tried to get better" and failed we'd both be able to take an all-expense paid two-week trip to Europe. See, this is the difference between us. You read what others write, listen to talk of players, writers, coaches, GMs, etc. as if they've never been wrong probably about as often as they are right or perhaps even more since they all tell you how they will all make the playoffs too. I mean of the 32 teams, how many coaches tell you that they will make the playoffs that season or that they believe they have the team in place to make them? What, 20? 25? 30? Only 12 make it. So many are wrong. Ditto on players.

 

Anyway, I don't care what Carrucci says. He's been massively wrong too. He also doesn't sit down and analyze our team the way you and I can and do. He wouldn't have time to do that and do it for all the other 31 teams that he covers, plus draft coverage, player movement, and all the other things he rights about, and still have time for himself and his family and remain sane. So you would be wise to discount what they say. As well, others don't share Carrucci's confidence, yet you would dismiss them, as professionals too. So how can you insist who is right and wrong before it happens?

 

The facts are that Edwards didn't play well. In my mind that had a lot to do with him yet I acknowledge that the team wasn't a playoff team around him for other reasons that impugn the organization however. I also recognize that the team bent over backwards for him to help him along by doing all that they could otherwise and he still sucked. So that's a two-edged sword which you're not willing to acknowledge. There are both pros and cons to his play this season. But the fact is that, and for whatever reason(s), he sucked last year. So he works from there. You on the other hand only make excuses. In this paragraph for example you only talk about how hard he's trying and what he's doing to improve as if everyone that has done that has succeeded when you know how foolish that take is on its own merits. As to the Mannings you're wrong. Peyton had 26 TDs as a rookie and only went up from there. Eli started only 7 games vice 9 and was a lot more consistent, BUT, he struggled in his first five starts and then came on in his last three starts to throw 5 TDs v. 3 INTs and had two games rated over 100 and one was against the 15-1 Steelers, not the "almost 0-16" Fins.

 

You honestly don't see a difference in the pattern of their rookie play, do you?

 

Otherwise, fair enough. When Edwards puts up the 24 TDs and 17 INTs that Eli did in his second season, perhaps we will agree with your position. But tell me, if/when that doesn't happen, are you only going to make more excuses? Or will you then admit that perhaps he's been overrated by the media?

 

As for Hardy, he did have good games against good teams. In 2007 he had big games against a number of big teams, including at least one that was better than top-35. Against Iowa he was 4-113-1, against Penn State he was 14-142-2, against Purdue he was 10-87-1. Penn State and Purdue were both better than top 35 last seasons, and he played very well against them. The Iowa game was on the road against a decent Iowa team in a tough environment. Hardy played well consistently last year, only having two games in 12 where he did not score a touchdown. He had 36 TDs in 33 total games for Indiana. That, to me, says that he played with consistency and played well consistently at Indiana. I agree with you on the fact that he doesn't run great LONG routes of 40+ yards. That isn't what we need him to do. We need him to do what both of your sources say he is best utilized for: short to intermediate routes over the middle where he can go up and get the football, and for fade routes and crossing routes in redzone situations. I think that he can catch forty balls and score six or seven TDs this season. And with how many close games we were in last year, even against some better teams, that would have made the difference. One TD against Denver, One TD against Dallas, and one more TD against either the Eagles or the Browns and we would have made the playoffs at 10-6.

 

2007 rankings:

 

Iowa: Pass: 62nd, Total: 36th

Penn State: Pass: 39th, Total: 11th

Purdue: Pass: 75th, Total: 63rd

 

Once again, get your facts straight. Otherwise, we'll see. Again, I'm not saying that Hardy won't do anything. Based on the general performance of rookie WRs though, I am definitely suggesting that since there really aren't any other major changes to the O besides just more talk from having Schonert at OC even though he's never done that, that I don't expect much of an upswing in offensive performance as a team this fall. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see Hardy do what you say, namely post about 500 yards and 5 TDs, but I also don't think that's gonna change things significantly.

 

The Big 12 was also relatively weak last year contrasted with past seasons.

 

 

Finally, I would love to have a team that was consistently good and was always beating the best teams and going 12-4 or 13-3 every season. However, this team isn't there YET. I think we are on our way there. I think that winning builds confidence. NE hasn't had a team filled with stars. They have a lot of above average guys who work hard, and a coaching staff that gave them a little bit of help by filming other teams' defensive signals and knowing what they were going to do during the game. However, Buffalo is now starting to get a team filled with better players. They have paid a lot of money to improve both the O-Line and the D-Line and basically the entire D. I think that there will be more changes on offense after this season, but I think that the Bills are at a make or break year. If they have a winning season, good things are in the future. If it is not what we are hoping for, then there will be more changes and I think a longer time to wait before we ever get better. Again, only time will tell, but the team is saying the right things, and I think that the coaches are doing the right things. I have been pleased with the direction the team has been moving over the last two or three years, and I hope they continue.

 

We've been saying this for years yet our front office keeps crapping out at the table regarding their draft picks and we hardly ever get great free agents. One or two here or there aren't going to make the difference. Also, if Hardy comes in and Evans leaves, which now looks to be the case, then we're just spinning our wheels in the mud.

 

NE is well managed and well coached in spite of all the cheating going on over there. We are not. Jauron is a poor coach, Brandon is a novice OJT GM, and our personnel guys have only proven that they aren't up to the task and have done a poor job for seven seasons now with only what, one winning season and a lackluster one at that.

 

"Better" when you measure players is relative. And I hope we're getting better players because up until now we have more or less had a team of backups that played starter.

 

After that, just read your last paragraph again and pay attention to what I've bolded for you and then tell me how much of that is something substantive that we as fans can hang our hats on? I mean do you truly believe that if enough people "think" and "hope" that it will make a difference? What will Jauron do with varying degrees of fan hopes? Will he alter anything? Do the players even know who believes/thinks/hopes what?

 

They all believe that they are good otherwise they shouldn't even suit up. Coaches all talk about making the playoffs or they shouldn't coach unless they are in year one of a rebuild. I mean they've been saying the exact same things in Buffalo for years and often with more actual reason for hope even. I think that the team in '05 was better than this one from a talent perspective.

 

Meanwhile, as you talk about all the stuff going forward, Schobel is in his last couple of seasons and if last year was any implication then he's finished as anything besides just a solid starter. Evans appears to be on his way out. Hardy had better become a top 10 WR in a hurry if you want improvement next year if that happens. If Stroud is anything but exceptional then he's on his back-9 easily too. And if Edwards is what I'm telling you he is, a complete bust, then this team ain't goin' anywhere in the next two or three seasons because we don't even have one QB waiting in the wings and JP wants out and will get out after this season.

 

That's an awful lot to be hoping happens. But we'll see.

[ax4782]

I'm not saying that the Bills have always made good decisions. But, I don't know how this FO's decision making is going to work out. The TD years were a joke, and the players that were brought in at that time have almost all disappeared and turned out to be failures for the organization. There is no arguing with that. Yet, the players that have come in since Levy/Brandon have come in don't have that same feeling. Whitner, Lynch, Poz (though clearly he has a lot to prove), even McCargo though we disagree here, seem to be the type of players that could really help this team. I know that you will point out that I said SEEM, but you have to admit they are of a different mold than the type of players that TD was bringing in, and they have a much better work ethic. The new FO has made much smarter moves since TD was ousted. They brought in a lot more talent on the O-Line. Again, you may disagree, but think how bad the line was before Dockery and Walker got here. They made a good, if not somewhat lucky move with Peters going to LT. This year they brought in a very good DT to help shore up the rotation. I don't know that Stroud will be as good as he was three years ago, but even if he is above average, that requires more attention by O-Lines, which should help everyone around him. They brought in Mitchell who is a solid upgrade at linebacker, adding much needed run stopping size, speed and experience to a very young corps. Whitner has been very good as a safety. He doesn't have a ton of picks, but he has a lot of tackles and is seemingly involved in some way on every play. Lynch IS an impact player. Ko Simpson is also a good player who has the potential again to be very good. We had a long time with TD to evaluate whether his decisions would pan out and when they turned out rotten, he was fired. And rightly so. If the Bills are better this season, i.e., they are in every game, win or lose, and keep things interesting, and the players improve, I would have to say that the team is going in the right direction. I don't expect them to go 12-4, but I would not be surprised at all if they were to win 10 games. I also wouldn't be surprised if they win 6. I just don't know at this point. You and I clearly have differing opinions about how well a player is going to do at certain positions. I don't think that Eli Manning was that good in his second season either. If he had been, people wouldn't have been calling for his head. He racked up a lot of meaningless TDs late in lost cause games that padded those stats. Much like you claim Trent did this season. And here are a list of Rookie QB stats for "the greats" of now and the past to show that in terms of numbers Trent is on about the same boat.

 

TRENT EDWARDS 10 Games 1630-7-8

Eli Manning 9 Games 1043-6-9

Matt Hasselback (With Seattle) 13 Games 2023-7-8

John Elway 11 Games 1663-7-14

Joe Montana (1980) 15 Games 1795-15-9

Joe Ferguson 14 Games 939-4-10

Troy Aikman 11 Games 1749-9-18

Joe Namath 13 Games 2220-18-15

Donovan McNabb 11 Games 948-8-7

Steve McNair (1997) 16 Games 2665-14-13

Steve Young (1986) 14 Games 2282-8-13

Joe Theisman (1978) 16 Games 2593-13-18

Dan Fouts 10 games 1126-6-13

Phil Simms 12 Games 1743-13-14

Brett Favre 15 games 3227-18-13

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/qbindex.htm

 

All statistics came from the above website. All I'm trying to say here is that most rookie QBs struggle, even the good ones, and do so in a fashion similar to what we saw with Trent. I'M NOT SAYING TRENT WILL BE AS GOOD AS ANY OF THESE OTHER PLAYERS. And consider that many of these greats had a year to sit on the bench and learn before getting thrown in the fire. That makes a difference. The fact is, I'm only saying that one should not rush to judgment on a QB because he had a bad rookie season. In fact some of these players had a bad year two as well. For example, Steve Young had two horrible seasons with Tampa before they traded him to the Niners, where he went on to win the Super Bowl. So, while Edwards wasn't spectacular and didn't sling 26 TDs, that is far from sucking. He was competent out there and made a lot of strides. You may argue that he didn't, but that is what it is. I watched those games and saw what I recognized as a lot of maturity and ability in the guy. Let's just give this team a chance to perform as a unit before rushing to judgment.

[krazykat]

I'm not saying that the Bills have always made good decisions. But, I don't know how this FO's decision making is going to work out. The TD years were a joke, and the players that were brought in at that time have almost all disappeared and turned out to be failures for the organization. There is no arguing with that. Yet, the players that have come in since Levy/Brandon have come in don't have that same feeling. Whitner, Lynch, Poz (though clearly he has a lot to prove), even McCargo though we disagree here, seem to be the type of players that could really help this team. I know that you will point out that I said SEEM, but you have to admit they are of a different mold than the type of players that TD was bringing in, and they have a much better work ethic. The new FO has made much smarter moves since TD was ousted. They brought in a lot more talent on the O-Line. Again, you may disagree, but think how bad the line was before Dockery and Walker got here. They made a good, if not somewhat lucky move with Peters going to LT. This year they brought in a very good DT to help shore up the rotation. I don't know that Stroud will be as good as he was three years ago, but even if he is above average, that requires more attention by O-Lines, which should help everyone around him. They brought in Mitchell who is a solid upgrade at linebacker, adding much needed run stopping size, speed and experience to a very young corps. Whitner has been very good as a safety. He doesn't have a ton of picks, but he has a lot of tackles and is seemingly involved in some way on every play. Lynch IS an impact player. Ko Simpson is also a good player who has the potential again to be very good. We had a long time with TD to evaluate whether his decisions would pan out and when they turned out rotten, he was fired. And rightly so. If the Bills are better this season, i.e., they are in every game, win or lose, and keep things interesting, and the players improve, I would have to say that the team is going in the right direction. I don't expect them to go 12-4, but I would not be surprised at all if they were to win 10 games. I also wouldn't be surprised if they win 6. I just don't know at this point. You and I clearly have differing opinions about how well a player is going to do at certain positions. I don't think that Eli Manning was that good in his second season either. If he had been, people wouldn't have been calling for his head. He racked up a lot of meaningless TDs late in lost cause games that padded those stats. Much like you claim Trent did this season. And here are a list of Rookie QB stats for "the greats" of now and the past to show that in terms of numbers Trent is on about the same boat.

 

TRENT EDWARDS 10 Games 1630-7-8

Eli Manning 9 Games 1043-6-9

Matt Hasselback (With Seattle) 13 Games 2023-7-8

John Elway 11 Games 1663-7-14

Joe Montana (1980) 15 Games 1795-15-9

Joe Ferguson 14 Games 939-4-10

Troy Aikman 11 Games 1749-9-18

Joe Namath 13 Games 2220-18-15

Donovan McNabb 11 Games 948-8-7

Steve McNair (1997) 16 Games 2665-14-13

Steve Young (1986) 14 Games 2282-8-13

Joe Theisman (1978) 16 Games 2593-13-18

Dan Fouts 10 games 1126-6-13

Phil Simms 12 Games 1743-13-14

Brett Favre 15 games 3227-18-13

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/qbindex.htm

 

All statistics came from the above website. All I'm trying to say here is that most rookie QBs struggle, even the good ones, and do so in a fashion similar to what we saw with Trent. I'M NOT SAYING TRENT WILL BE AS GOOD AS ANY OF THESE OTHER PLAYERS. And consider that many of these greats had a year to sit on the bench and learn before getting thrown in the fire. That makes a difference. The fact is, I'm only saying that one should not rush to judgment on a QB because he had a bad rookie season. In fact some of these players had a bad year two as well. For example, Steve Young had two horrible seasons with Tampa before they traded him to the Niners, where he went on to win the Super Bowl. So, while Edwards wasn't spectacular and didn't sling 26 TDs, that is far from sucking. He was competent out there and made a lot of strides. You may argue that he didn't, but that is what it is. I watched those games and saw what I recognized as a lot of maturity and ability in the guy. Let's just give this team a chance to perform as a unit before rushing to judgment.

 

On the above, you say all of that initially but then I will counter with yeah, but we were still terrible on offense and not good on D. So what you're saying in essence is "look at all of these piece parts, they're great. I can't wait." What I'm saying is "yeah, but the sum of the parts still stunk. I think you're overvaluing the individual parts or something else must explain it all."

 

Yes, Fairchild is gone, but the D wasn't good and Fewell still remains as does the person overseeing it all in Jauron, whose track record after 8 seasons sucks.

 

As to the QBs, I pointed out one enormous difference between Edwards and Eli Manning, and you just completely ignored it. So you'll see what you want to see there. All I can say is let's reconvene about a month or two into the season and reevaluate there.

 

I can also point out some QBs too from the same source, which is a very good source and very legit:

 

All former 1st-round picks:

 

David Carr 16 Games, 2,592, 9-15

Joey Harrington 14 Games, 2,294, 12-16

Patrick Ramsey 10 Games, 1,539, 9-8

Tim Couch 15 Games, 2,447, 15-13

Cade McNown 15 Games, 1,465 8-10

Heath Shuler 11 Games, 1,658, 10-12

Rick Mirer, 16 Games, 2,833, 12-17

 

Everyone, most drafted high in the 1st, was a complete bust. All of them, or just about all of them, played better than TE and most didn't even have the talent that TE had.

 

So what? So which one of us is "right" based on the evidence presented? You can't simply throw up the play of other QBs and apply that to another QB under different circumstances and a variety of different factors. I will dismiss my list as quickly as I dismiss yours.

 

I will also say that most of them didn't have even a Marshawn Lynch or Lee Evans. It's one thing to suggest that Evans was tied up in double coverage all the time which is reasonable. But he was tied up with Losman too and JP did more with it. Either way, my point is not between the two, but is that most of those other QBs on my list didn't even have that talent to get tied up to begin with.

 

Most teams don't even have a Lee Evans much less two or three very good WRs. So all of this talk is as if Edwards needs the equivalent of the Colts skill position talent around him just to make it fair so that he can become average. I'm not buying it. In fact, I think you and everyone else will be all over him by midseason. But we'll see. Not much more to discuss now. You see what you want to see, and I see a QB that had one very good game from a TD perspective but only a fairly decent game by other measures, and no good games besides that. I don't really understand what there is to build on.

 

Yes, things have changed, but "changes" do not guarantee results. Either way, he did suck in every game but one, perhaps two. Otherwise start listing the games that you think he "didn't suck" in and we can carry on the converstion about those. You up for it? But you can't just dismiss the notion that he didn't suck when he did except for really one game vs. the 1-15 Dolphins.

[ax4782]

Again, and I can't repeat this enough, I didn't think the TE was some great savior quarterback. I thought he played OK for a rookie and that I saw a lot of things in his game that demonstrate to me a lot of potential for improvement. I know that's more I think talk to you, but all I'm saying is that I think the bill is still out on him. He should get some credit for making a solid effort this offseason to get bigger, to work harder and longer with his WRs to help him with those timing patterns, and putting in more time than anyone else getting familiar with the new offensive system. He appeared to be making good strides at the end of OTAs. That being said, I think we can both agree that the jury is out on him. And I will say right here, that if eight weeks go by and we are 3-5 or worse, I probably will begin to look at him with more of a seriously negative eye. He will have had nineteen starts as an NFL QB at that point, more than one season. He won't be a rookie anymore and I will be expecting him to buckle his chinstrap and really start to show something. If he is playing well, I assume that you will take the opposite position. I just think it is too early to dismiss him as a terrible QB. I do think that he had a couple of really crappy games last year. There is no denying that. But, he did have a decent game against the Giants. He threw as many TDs against them as Tom Brady did. (Just a joke, though it is true). Again, while I don't think that TE was fantastic or overpowering in every start, he did make good decisions with the football. I don't want to argue about who's perspective about his play in a certain game is right or wrong, because that is not productive. What I am interested to hear is your alternative at this point. I'm not asking to be an ass, I'm serious. You clearly follow the team and know what's going on, which is a rarity on this board. I'm interested to hear what changes you would implement now, and for next season, within reason and possibility, to make the team better. I have my own ideas, but I would like to hear yours first.

 

As for overvaluing certain pieces, that might be true, but the way I see it, O-Lines improve as they play together. Last year the line was mostly intact, with few injuries, and they did seem to get better as the season progressed into what I would call an above average unit by the end of the season. We were rarely out of a game over the last seven weeks, excluding the game against NE. Then, of course, no one really was able to keep up with NE, except the Giants. I happen to think that we have the right pieces in place and that the D would have been much better last season if it hadn't been for all of the injuries. Fewell, I think, is a good coordinator, though you seem to disagree. This is the make or break season for this coaching staff, so we'll have to wait it out and see how they perform.

[krazykat]

I understand what you're saying, I simply see a bust QB based on my years of experience and watching QBs, football, etc.

 

I've pared your response to the stuff you want me to address and to another point(s) of interest;

 

1. That being said, I think we can both agree that the jury is out on him. And I will say right here, that if eight weeks go by and we are 3-5 or worse, I probably will begin to look at him with more of a seriously negative eye.

 

2. If he is playing well, I assume that you will take the opposite position. I just think it is too early to dismiss him as a terrible QB. I do think that he had a couple of really crappy games last year. There is no denying that.

 

3. What I am interested to hear is your alternative at this point. I'm not asking to be an ass, I'm serious. You clearly follow the team and know what's going on, which is a rarity on this board. I'm interested to hear what changes you would implement now, and for next season, within reason and possibility, to make the team better. I have my own ideas, but I would like to hear yours first.

 

4. As for overvaluing certain pieces, that might be true, but the way I see it, O-Lines improve as they play together. Last year the line was mostly intact, with few injuries, and they did seem to get better as the season progressed into what I would call an above average unit by the end of the season. We were rarely out of a game over the last seven weeks, excluding the game against NE. Then, of course, no one really was able to keep up with NE, except the Giants. I happen to think that we have the right pieces in place and that the D would have been much better last season if it hadn't been for all of the injuries. Fewell, I think, is a good coordinator, though you seem to disagree. This is the make or break season for this coaching staff, so we'll have to wait it out and see how they perform.

 

1. See, here's one of the differences between you and I. I will evaluate Edwards based on his play, not necessarily and exclusivel the team's record.

 

If we're 3-5 but Edwards has a rating of 85 and has 10 TDs and only 6 picks and the offense is averaging 21 ppg, and we're losing games because we're averaging 26 PA us, then I will be light on him. Also, if Lynch say were to have gotten hurt and Edwards is playing OK otherwise, IMO that'd be a feather in his cap.

 

On the other hand, if we're 5-3 but he's pitched 11 INTs to 6 TDs and Lynch has carried the team offensively while we've won a game or two on the merits of D/STs, then I give him zero credit.

 

2. If he's playing well you'll hear it from me first if I'm around. Otherwise, you say that there's no denying that he had a couple of really crappy games last year. So allow me to challenge you. Of his starts, which games do you think weren't "really crappy?"

 

3. That's a tough question because this team IMO is so far down the wrong path that only a complete rebuild will fix it.

 

First, we need a GM that understands the environment from a managerial and personnel standpoint, and one that understands that the lines are where it all starts. We don't have that and haven't for a while since AJ Smith and Polian left.

 

We need a coach that understands the same things. We don't have one.

 

We need a personnel department with a staff that gets it and has a track record of decent moves. Neither Modrak, Guy, or Majeski have that. I'd fire all three and either promote some new ones or get someone that knows WTF he's doing immediately.

 

Much of the team's issues have to do with talent. You will see more acquisitions not stepping up this year, I promise you.

 

Otherwise, l more or less view your question as a drunken driver handing me the keys to his car which sits straddling a guard rail with the two drive wheels in the air telling me that he agrees to let me drive now. Yeah, thanks. LOL

 

Also, we have image problems too. Ruben Brown, Jennings, McGahee, Pat Williams, Spikes, now Evans and JP, and probably a few more, have left the team in recent years talking about how shi--y this team is from their/player standpoint. Regardless of whether or not it's true, and I have no reason to doubt them coupled with my own observations, it's a perception that this team now faces. If we s--t the bed again this year, where will we be? At square one. Then we start all over where Wilson goes on the cheap for everything.

 

4. You talk about how the OL improved last season. But at the end of the year were some of our worst games in terms of ball movement and scoring. Again, your "thinking" doesn't match reality. The defenses that we faced were not good either.

[dave mcbride]

In parts:

 

 

 

We have mostly had "long and shi--y seasons" for a while now with any hopes being of the white-knuckle variety and always directly hinged to how bad our competition is. Regardless, we cannot ccntrol that so one way or another we're just along for the ride. No problem however and I appreciate the clarification.

 

As to the team "trying to address the needs," I believe it has tried, I just believe that it has people in key positions that are inept, ignorant, just not very bright, or some combination of those things. Otherwise our drafts would have produced a lot more than just a continual revolving door of hopes that keeps flipping around every third year with hardly any players from more than three or four drafts ago still on the team and no impact ones. Not to mention that fact that we really don't have any impact players Lynch's and Stroud's seasons pending. I mean when your biggest impact players by a long shot are your P and KR, WTF does that say?

 

I mean honestly, those two, Moorman and McGee, are collectively the team's MVP now since they've been with us almost.

 

You talk about the team having done a nice job of addressing the DT position; First of all, let's not talk about Stroud since we don't know how he will play this year. It's not unwise to think that he may not be the player he was. He's always been tops IMO, but he's got injury issue resolutions and we don't know to what extents his steroid use factored in.

 

Otherwise, allow me to recount for your the efforts of the team to address our DT situation since Pat Williams and Ted Washington left in '05 and '01 respectively; Sam Adams whom the team overpaid for and who provided spotty and inconsistent play; Ron Edwards 3rd Round '01; Justin Bannan 5th round '02; Lavale Sape 6th Round '03; Tim "High Motor" Andersen 3rd Round '04; John "Trade Up" McCargo 1st Round '06; Kyle Williams 5th Round '06. The jury's very much out on McCargo with this pretty much being the year that he needs to be able to pin down a starting spot and show that he's capable of being an every down DT like Stroud if trading up into the 1st is to be justified. Otherwise the decision to trade up hasn't been in two seasons now, and 1st rounders are expected to start, at least DL players, immediately. You don't draft them as depth. Well, I suppose the Bills do.

 

Otherwise, let me ask you openly, which of those moves in seven offseasons addressing the DT spot have been very good decisions? Can you name one free agent brought on board to play DT that did it well during that time?

 

Otherwise, so what, eight seasons after you and I agree we had issues, we finally bring in Stroud and this is good management as you see it?

 

Also, you talk about McCargo disrupting plays, I think you've been reading Chris Brown and the Bills' stuff too much. He's been incredibly inconsistent, has hardly any sacks to show for all that effort, and it's not as if teams must "plan for him" making sacks difficult. He also hasn't even been able to hold down a starting spot. So something's not adding up here. He is definitely not an impact player.

 

See, one of the things that I've noticed is that fans often see one or a few plays by a player and in their mind that becomes the standard and norm for what that player brings. Sure, McCargo, just like just about every other player in the NFL has his moments, but they're rare. You can't take Edwards' Miami game, or McCargo's Miami game and make them the standard. Meanwhile, he has what, 2.5 sacks last year and one of them vs. Denver fell right into his lap. After that he had 1.5 in the final game of the season. He isn't a great run stuffer or our run D wouldn't be so bad. You mention TFL but he hardly had any tackles for a DT to begin with. I don't want to get off on McCargo, but look at the big picture and reconsider your position.

 

Either way, this is McCargo's 3rd season, he's not coming off a rookie season, and in looking at the big picture of our DTs since TW and PW left, if we had done a good job for seven seasons then we wouldn't have needed to go get Stroud this offseason. Plain and simple.

 

 

 

 

If we both had a dollar for every player that came into the NFL that "tried to get better" and failed we'd both be able to take an all-expense paid two-week trip to Europe. See, this is the difference between us. You read what others write, listen to talk of players, writers, coaches, GMs, etc. as if they've never been wrong probably about as often as they are right or perhaps even more since they all tell you how they will all make the playoffs too. I mean of the 32 teams, how many coaches tell you that they will make the playoffs that season or that they believe they have the team in place to make them? What, 20? 25? 30? Only 12 make it. So many are wrong. Ditto on players.

 

Anyway, I don't care what Carrucci says. He's been massively wrong too. He also doesn't sit down and analyze our team the way you and I can and do. He wouldn't have time to do that and do it for all the other 31 teams that he covers, plus draft coverage, player movement, and all the other things he rights about, and still have time for himself and his family and remain sane. So you would be wise to discount what they say. As well, others don't share Carrucci's confidence, yet you would dismiss them, as professionals too. So how can you insist who is right and wrong before it happens?

 

The facts are that Edwards didn't play well. In my mind that had a lot to do with him yet I acknowledge that the team wasn't a playoff team around him for other reasons that impugn the organization however. I also recognize that the team bent over backwards for him to help him along by doing all that they could otherwise and he still sucked. So that's a two-edged sword which you're not willing to acknowledge. There are both pros and cons to his play this season. But the fact is that, and for whatever reason(s), he sucked last year. So he works from there. You on the other hand only make excuses. In this paragraph for example you only talk about how hard he's trying and what he's doing to improve as if everyone that has done that has succeeded when you know how foolish that take is on its own merits. As to the Mannings you're wrong. Peyton had 26 TDs as a rookie and only went up from there. Eli started only 7 games vice 9 and was a lot more consistent, BUT, he struggled in his first five starts and then came on in his last three starts to throw 5 TDs v. 3 INTs and had two games rated over 100 and one was against the 15-1 Steelers, not the "almost 0-16" Fins.

 

You honestly don't see a difference in the pattern of their rookie play, do you?

 

Otherwise, fair enough. When Edwards puts up the 24 TDs and 17 INTs that Eli did in his second season, perhaps we will agree with your position. But tell me, if/when that doesn't happen, are you only going to make more excuses? Or will you then admit that perhaps he's been overrated by the media?

 

 

 

2007 rankings:

 

Iowa: Pass: 62nd, Total: 36th

Penn State: Pass: 39th, Total: 11th

Purdue: Pass: 75th, Total: 63rd

 

Once again, get your facts straight. Otherwise, we'll see. Again, I'm not saying that Hardy won't do anything. Based on the general performance of rookie WRs though, I am definitely suggesting that since there really aren't any other major changes to the O besides just more talk from having Schonert at OC even though he's never done that, that I don't expect much of an upswing in offensive performance as a team this fall. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see Hardy do what you say, namely post about 500 yards and 5 TDs, but I also don't think that's gonna change things significantly.

 

The Big 12 was also relatively weak last year contrasted with past seasons.

 

 

 

 

We've been saying this for years yet our front office keeps crapping out at the table regarding their draft picks and we hardly ever get great free agents. One or two here or there aren't going to make the difference. Also, if Hardy comes in and Evans leaves, which now looks to be the case, then we're just spinning our wheels in the mud.

 

NE is well managed and well coached in spite of all the cheating going on over there. We are not. Jauron is a poor coach, Brandon is a novice OJT GM, and our personnel guys have only proven that they aren't up to the task and have done a poor job for seven seasons now with only what, one winning season and a lackluster one at that.

 

"Better" when you measure players is relative. And I hope we're getting better players because up until now we have more or less had a team of backups that played starter.

 

After that, just read your last paragraph again and pay attention to what I've bolded for you and then tell me how much of that is something substantive that we as fans can hang our hats on? I mean do you truly believe that if enough people "think" and "hope" that it will make a difference? What will Jauron do with varying degrees of fan hopes? Will he alter anything? Do the players even know who believes/thinks/hopes what?

 

They all believe that they are good otherwise they shouldn't even suit up. Coaches all talk about making the playoffs or they shouldn't coach unless they are in year one of a rebuild. I mean they've been saying the exact same things in Buffalo for years and often with more actual reason for hope even. I think that the team in '05 was better than this one from a talent perspective.

 

Meanwhile, as you talk about all the stuff going forward, Schobel is in his last couple of seasons and if last year was any implication then he's finished as anything besides just a solid starter. Evans appears to be on his way out. Hardy had better become a top 10 WR in a hurry if you want improvement next year if that happens. If Stroud is anything but exceptional then he's on his back-9 easily too. And if Edwards is what I'm telling you he is, a complete bust, then this team ain't goin' anywhere in the next two or three seasons because we don't even have one QB waiting in the wings and JP wants out and will get out after this season.

 

That's an awful lot to be hoping happens. But we'll see.

Nice post. Quick question however: in 2000-01 were you one of the many bashing Butler et al? If you weren't, my apologies for even bringing it up. But in retrospect, there were far too many Bills fans who didn't recognize that the Bills were a consistently solid team on the talent front throughout the 90s. And SD is obviously loaded, and has been for four years. The point is, negativity is easy.

[dave mcbride]

On the above, you say all of that initially but then I will counter with yeah, but we were still terrible on offense and not good on D. So what you're saying in essence is "look at all of these piece parts, they're great. I can't wait." What I'm saying is "yeah, but the sum of the parts still stunk. I think you're overvaluing the individual parts or something else must explain it all."

 

Yes, Fairchild is gone, but the D wasn't good and Fewell still remains as does the person overseeing it all in Jauron, whose track record after 8 seasons sucks.

 

As to the QBs, I pointed out one enormous difference between Edwards and Eli Manning, and you just completely ignored it. So you'll see what you want to see there. All I can say is let's reconvene about a month or two into the season and reevaluate there.

 

I can also point out some QBs too from the same source, which is a very good source and very legit:

 

All former 1st-round picks:

 

David Carr 16 Games, 2,592, 9-15

Joey Harrington 14 Games, 2,294, 12-16

Patrick Ramsey 10 Games, 1,539, 9-8

Tim Couch 15 Games, 2,447, 15-13

Cade McNown 15 Games, 1,465 8-10

Heath Shuler 11 Games, 1,658, 10-12

Rick Mirer, 16 Games, 2,833, 12-17

 

Everyone, most drafted high in the 1st, was a complete bust. All of them, or just about all of them, played better than TE and most didn't even have the talent that TE had.

 

So what? So which one of us is "right" based on the evidence presented? You can't simply throw up the play of other QBs and apply that to another QB under different circumstances and a variety of different factors. I will dismiss my list as quickly as I dismiss yours.

 

I will also say that most of them didn't have even a Marshawn Lynch or Lee Evans. It's one thing to suggest that Evans was tied up in double coverage all the time which is reasonable. But he was tied up with Losman too and JP did more with it. Either way, my point is not between the two, but is that most of those other QBs on my list didn't even have that talent to get tied up to begin with.

 

Most teams don't even have a Lee Evans much less two or three very good WRs. So all of this talk is as if Edwards needs the equivalent of the Colts skill position talent around him just to make it fair so that he can become average. I'm not buying it. In fact, I think you and everyone else will be all over him by midseason. But we'll see. Not much more to discuss now. You see what you want to see, and I see a QB that had one very good game from a TD perspective but only a fairly decent game by other measures, and no good games besides that. I don't really understand what there is to build on.

 

Yes, things have changed, but "changes" do not guarantee results. Either way, he did suck in every game but one, perhaps two. Otherwise start listing the games that you think he "didn't suck" in and we can carry on the converstion about those. You up for it? But you can't just dismiss the notion that he didn't suck when he did except for really one game vs. the 1-15 Dolphins.

Only a person whose argument is based solely on stats would think that any of those guys listed played better than Edwards in their first year. The problem with virtually everyone listed here was an inability to play intelligently at the accelerated speed of the NFL game or throw accurately, and it's why most of them tanked. That, manifestly, was not a problem for Edwards. Take the Giants and Browns game out of the stats, and he's throwing at around a 65% completion rate.

[dave mcbride]

4. You talk about how the OL improved last season. But at the end of the year were some of our worst games in terms of ball movement and scoring. Again, your "thinking" doesn't match reality. The defenses that we faced were not good either.

Final 3 games of the season: Cleveland, the Giants, and on the road against a red-hot Philly defense and minus Lee Evans for 3/4 of the game.

[krazykat]

Nice post. Quick question however: in 2000-01 were you one of the many bashing Butler et al? If you weren't, my apologies for even bringing it up. But in retrospect, there were far too many Bills fans who didn't recognize that the Bills were a consistently solid team on the talent front throughout the 90s. And SD is obviously loaded, and has been for four years. The point is, negativity is easy.

Thanks, but no. I didn't bash Butler, but to tell you the truth, it was more AJ than Butler. And the point is reinforced since SD's only improved since Butler's passing under AJ.

 

I was one of the lone voices in the wind bashing Donahoe even before they put the contract together, and staunchly. There was plenty of info out there to suggest that what happened would happen.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Only a person whose argument is based solely on stats would think that any of those guys listed played better than Edwards in their first year. The problem with virtually everyone listed here was an inability to play intelligently at the accelerated speed of the NFL game or throw accurately, and it's why most of them tanked. That, manifestly, was not a problem for Edwards. Take the Giants and Browns game out of the stats, and he's throwing at around a 65% completion rate.

What do you make of the comment that Edwards said he had a lot of room to improve in going through his progressions rather than just the pre-snap read?

[dave mcbride]

What do you make of the comment that Edwards said he had a lot of room to improve in going through his progressions rather than just the pre-snap read?

I guess I read it as a good sign - he's intent on improving. Pre-snap reads are really important, though, given that defenses are predicated on fooling a QB before the snap. He seems to have that part of it down, which is a good thing. Bledsoe never got it, as far as I could tell. Making quick post-snap progressions will come in time. I certainly don't think he's a flawless player -- just that regarding the mental aspect of the game, he's clearly a bright guy who is appropriately analytical.

[krazykat]

Only a person whose argument is based solely on stats would think that any of those guys listed played better than Edwards in their first year. The problem with virtually everyone listed here was an inability to play intelligently at the accelerated speed of the NFL game or throw accurately, and it's why most of them tanked. That, manifestly, was not a problem for Edwards. Take the Giants and Browns game out of the stats, and he's throwing at around a 65% completion rate.

You know, once again I just don't know what to do with posts like this. Are you engaging me? If so, then you're just setting yourself up for the easy spike.

 

Here were Edwards game by game stats in games that he started:

 

Opp Cmp Att %

NWE 10 20 50.0%

NYJ 22 28 78.6%

DAL 23 31 74.2%

BAL 11 21 52.4%

NYJ 14 21 66.7%

WAS 22 36 61.1%

MIA 11 23 47.8%

CLE 13 33 39.4%

NYG 9 26 34.6%

PHI 16 30 53.3%

 

First of all, your statement isn't even correct at face value. He threw 53% in the Philly game, 48% in the Miami game that he threw 4 TDs in, 52% v. Baltimore and 50% v. NE in a non-start.

 

Second of all, did you ever ask why his percentages were so high in some games yet his yardage, the team's ability to move the ball, and particularly offensive scoring were so piss poor?

 

Is the goal to avoid sacks and have a high completion percentage? If in your mind that's the case, then we can end even discussing this.

 

Otherwise, here are the team's offensive scores and total yardage and passing yardage in his only four games in which he pitched at over 53.5%:

 

Jets 78.6% - 14 offensive, 3 STs/FG, 304 net yards, 218 net passing. One TD drive was 25 yards set up by a D-INT.

Dallas 74.2% - 0 offensive, 3 STs/FG, 229 net yards, 148 net passing.

Jets 66.7% - 0 offensive, 6 STs/FG, 7 offensive (Losman to Evans in last minutes), 180 net yards and 126 net passing w/ Edwards in there. The team put up almost as many yards in both categories with Losman in there on the last four drives on which the team scored the last 10 and winning points.

Washington 61.1% - 0 offensive, 15 STs/FGs, 357 net yards, 257 net passing.

 

Now, are you really willing to back up the notion that that was anything but piss poor?

 

I mean are you really trying to defend Edwards, rookie or not, based on the notions of his completion percentages?

 

And here are his 1st-down passes in those games respectively:

 

15

9

10

10

 

I'm just not getting it here. If you want to defend Edwards, I'm sure there are things that you can say. But this is a bit ridiculous, don't you think? I mean three games with 0 offensive points and you're boasting based on some other meaningless stat considering that. And only 14 offensive points against the Jets, whose defense had more holes than ours.

 

In the meantime, here are the rest of his starts:

 

Opp Cmp Att %

BAL 11 21 52.4%

MIA 11 23 47.8%

CLE 13 33 39.4%

NYG 9 26 34.6%

PHI 16 30 53.3%

[VOR]

I agree with krazykat about how Edwards doesn't really deserve credit for the wins last year, since the Bills would have won those games with Losman, if not won the Cowboys game, and very possibly the Browns and Eagles games with Losman starting instead. I guess though I can give him credit for not losing those games, because he was a rookie.

 

And given Fairchild's inane scheme, coupled with no audibles, the lack of a true #2 WR (Price was no great shakes in 2006, but he was still far and away better than Reed last year) and max protect schemes to protect the rookie QB that by definition limit offensive chances, it's not exactly hard to see why the offense was so abyssmal. Add to that a defense decimated by injuries and a ST's unit that fell-off quite a bit last year, and it's amazing the team made it to 7-9, with the 9th hardest strength of schedule (albeit tied with 9 other teams).

 

But I disagree that this teams needs a complete overhaul. I think the Bills did a great job of addressing most of their needs, save TE, over the off-season, with the caveat that a lot will depend on the health of Stroud, not to mention the team overall (but that's always the case). Losing Denney and Hargrove at DE were big blows to the defense early-on, as were losing Simpson and Poz for the season, not to mention Kiwaukee Thomas. Shoring-up the interior of the D-line, having better depth at DE, replacing Ellison with Mitchell, getting Poz and Simpson back, and Greer having another year in the system with McKelvin nipping at the heels of McGee and James being a good veteran depth player, and this defense could be a good one, and with good depth.

 

On offense, Edwards getting his rookie year behind him will be huge. So too should be the addition of Hardy, whose size and speed will force defenses to have to account for him. I also think that Schouman will be a nice receiving option for Edwards. WRT ST's, I hope they rebound, but this is the area of which I'm most unsure.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I guess I read it as a good sign - he's intent on improving.

OK. But, seriously, doesn't this cover the vast majority of NFL players?

Pre-snap reads are really important, though, given that defenses are predicated on fooling a QB before the snap. He seems to have that part of it down, which is a good thing.

Well, maybe. What's to say the pre-snap read isn't to confuse him into throwing a check-down pass and then swarm the WR under instantly?

Bledsoe never got it, as far as I could tell.

Bledsoe was a serious stud in the pocket; defensive lineman used to bounce off of him. I'm not sure he was the sort to panic back there. He also had a huge cannon and the desire to use it. He gets a bum rap because the kid that replaced him in New England is phenomenal. That doesn't mean Bledsoe never did anything well.

Making quick post-snap progressions will come in time.

Or they won't.

I certainly don't think he's a flawless player -- just that regarding the mental aspect of the game, he's clearly a bright guy who is appropriately analytical.

He is a very bright guy that reportedly has other interests and pursuits outside of football. He's being thrown to the wolves early in his career and his coach has issued the "playoffs or bust" ultimatum. But, yeah, it could be worse.

[dave mcbride]

You know, once again I just don't know what to do with posts like this. Are you engaging me? If so, then you're just setting yourself up for the easy spike.

 

Here were Edwards game by game stats in games that he started:

 

Opp Cmp Att %

NWE 10 20 50.0%

NYJ 22 28 78.6%

DAL 23 31 74.2%

BAL 11 21 52.4%

NYJ 14 21 66.7%

WAS 22 36 61.1%

MIA 11 23 47.8%

CLE 13 33 39.4%

NYG 9 26 34.6%

PHI 16 30 53.3%

 

First of all, your statement isn't even correct at face value. He threw 53% in the Philly game, 48% in the Miami game that he threw 4 TDs in, 52% v. Baltimore and 50% v. NE in a non-start.

 

Second of all, did you ever ask why his percentages were so high in some games yet his yardage, the team's ability to move the ball, and particularly offensive scoring were so piss poor?

 

Is the goal to avoid sacks and have a high completion percentage? If in your mind that's the case, then we can end even discussing this.

 

Otherwise, here are the team's offensive scores and total yardage and passing yardage in his only four games in which he pitched at over 53.5%:

 

Jets 78.6% - 14 offensive, 3 STs/FG, 304 net yards, 218 net passing. One TD drive was 25 yards set up by a D-INT.

Dallas 74.2% - 0 offensive, 3 STs/FG, 229 net yards, 148 net passing.

Jets 66.7% - 0 offensive, 6 STs/FG, 7 offensive (Losman to Evans in last minutes), 180 net yards and 126 net passing w/ Edwards in there. The team put up almost as many yards in both categories with Losman in there on the last four drives on which the team scored the last 10 and winning points.

Washington 61.1% - 0 offensive, 15 STs/FGs, 357 net yards, 257 net passing.

 

Now, are you really willing to back up the notion that that was anything but piss poor?

 

I mean are you really trying to defend Edwards, rookie or not, based on the notions of his completion percentages?

 

And here are his 1st-down passes in those games respectively:

 

15

9

10

10

 

I'm just not getting it here. If you want to defend Edwards, I'm sure there are things that you can say. But this is a bit ridiculous, don't you think? I mean three games with 0 offensive points and you're boasting based on some other meaningless stat considering that. And only 14 offensive points against the Jets, whose defense had more holes than ours.

 

In the meantime, here are the rest of his starts:

 

Opp Cmp Att %

BAL 11 21 52.4%

MIA 11 23 47.8%

CLE 13 33 39.4%

NYG 9 26 34.6%

PHI 16 30 53.3%

I guess what I focused on is different from what you focused on -- how he actually played on a play-by-play basis for a rookie. He was often highly accurate, got rid of the ball quickly, and in general seemed to know what he was doing and have a ready command of the basics of how the offense functioned. He was also a rookie, and very inexperienced. As I'm guessing you did, I watched every game, usually twice. I also watched Cade McNown a lot his first year (not to mention JP), and in contrast to David Carr -- the proverbial sack machine -- he rarely put himself in a position where he was regularly pounded. I just don't see how statistically based arguments like this one can capture that. To my eye, he was remarkably better than the stiffs you listed above. It's not for nothing that most people who know something about QBing think he's going to be good. FWIW, Rich Gannon said that his debut against the Jets was the best performance he ever saw by a debuting rookie QB -- ever. And it's not as if they're buddies or anything like that.

 

p.s. While we disagree given that we prioritize different issues, I don't think there's really any need to be so snide and condescending. I watch a lot of football, and am quite familiar with the stats you cite above. I just don't place as much stock in them given that he was a rookie coming off a season ending injury in college who looked like he was in command of the offense. I'm sure that I'll get flamed for the "poise" argument, but I stand by what I said. I think that within a couple of years, he'll be a very efficient, upper echelon starting QB, a la Drew Brees -- another average-armed QB who struggled early on but who is intelligent and can process the NFL game quickly and intelligently.

[Hazed and Amuzed]

See, once again, you are looking at the high level stats and not how he did in individual games. But naturally, having done your homework you noticed that he rarely if ever has very good games against top passing defenses or even top defenses in general, right?

 

To me that matters since the NFL isn't exactly laden with players from Ball St., Indiana St., Western Michigan, and Akron. To you it may not. But the better indication is how will he play against NFL caliber competition, but if he didn't play well vs. top 30 college Ds then why will he excel against NFL caliber Ds and DBs?

 

I'm not saying he won't, he may very well. But I'm not sold and I'd expect a player like Johnson to do a lot more because he's proven that he can do it against that top competition and especially in the big games.

 

You and others talk as if collegiate performance translates to NFL effectiveness automatically when you should know better and probably do but are just ignoring what you know.

 

Either way, if players struggle against the best in college, what basis is there for more hope in the NFL?

 

So from reading this post I can asses that according to you, college stats or performances don't transfer to the NFL unless the competition was at a higher level such as the SEC, just to use your example, am I right with this assessment?. The problem with that train of thought is that I'm pretty sure that our first round pick played close to or even lower level competition then Hardy, yet I haven't seen you bring that up. I haven't read every post in this thread word for word though so maybe I missed it.

 

James Hardy last year played against 4 teams that finished in the top 25 and he scored a TD in 3 of those games. Now I know you're going to bring up those teams weaker pass defenses but see those stats are skewed as well. Hell, Army had the 16th best pass defense last year and they won only 3 games.

 

I usually don't buy into stats that much but 36 TD's in 30 games can't be ignored at a Div 1 school.

 

As far as playing not so well against the higher competition lets have a look see at what he did before this last year, We've already established him having a TD in 3 of the 4 games involving a ranked team.

 

Last year he scored 4 TD's against Mich St., 3 against Iowa. In 2005 as a Freshman he scored 2 TD's against Wisc., Illinois and Mich st. Now while those teams may not be the cream of the crop in the NCAA they are some of the BEST teams he faced in those years. That's right, the only games he didn't score a TD in his Fresh and Soph. years were 1 game against Ohio st. as a Freshman and one as a Soph. against Mich. where he left the game early due to injury.

 

The kid has performed at maybe not the highest level of college competition but it's not like he is playing Kent every week.

 

Also as a side note the level of competition he has faced is equal to if not more then the talent he has around him. He had an okay counterpart at WR in Indiana but Andrew Means ain't the one drawing a double team. The rushing attack they had last year was less then admirable with Marcus Thigpen gaining a whopping 568 yards. Kellen Lewis ran the ball almost half as many times as he threw it and when he did throw it more then a third of his 3043 yards went to Hardy.

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make is this:

 

Every team Hardy and Indiana played knew he was the offense and they doubled and sometimes triple teamed him. Yet he was dominate, 36 td's in 30 games dominate. While I know this doesn't always translate to the NFL it is a sign of what he can do.

[ax4782]

So from reading this post I can asses that according to you, college stats or performances don't transfer to the NFL unless the competition was at a higher level such as the SEC, just to use your example, am I right with this assessment?. The problem with that train of thought is that I'm pretty sure that our first round pick played close to or even lower level competition then Hardy, yet I haven't seen you bring that up. I haven't read every post in this thread word for word though so maybe I missed it.

 

James Hardy last year played against 4 teams that finished in the top 25 and he scored a TD in 3 of those games. Now I know you're going to bring up those teams weaker pass defenses but see those stats are skewed as well. Hell, Army had the 16th best pass defense last year and they won only 3 games.

 

I usually don't buy into stats that much but 36 TD's in 30 games can't be ignored at a Div 1 school.

 

As far as playing not so well against the higher competition lets have a look see at what he did before this last year, We've already established him having a TD in 3 of the 4 games involving a ranked team.

 

Last year he scored 4 TD's against Mich St., 3 against Iowa. In 2005 as a Freshman he scored 2 TD's against Wisc., Illinois and Mich st. Now while those teams may not be the cream of the crop in the NCAA they are some of the BEST teams he faced in those years. That's right, the only games he didn't score a TD in his Fresh and Soph. years were 1 game against Ohio st. as a Freshman and one as a Soph. against Mich. where he left the game early due to injury.

 

The kid has performed at maybe not the highest level of college competition but it's not like he is playing Kent every week.

 

Also as a side note the level of competition he has faced is equal to if not more then the talent he has around him. He had an okay counterpart at WR in Indiana but Andrew Means ain't the one drawing a double team. The rushing attack they had last year was less then admirable with Marcus Thigpen gaining a whopping 568 yards. Kellen Lewis ran the ball almost half as many times as he threw it and when he did throw it more then a third of his 3043 yards went to Hardy.

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make is this:

 

Every team Hardy and Indiana played knew he was the offense and they doubled and sometimes triple teamed him. Yet he was dominate, 36 td's in 30 games dominate. While I know this doesn't always translate to the NFL it is a sign of what he can do.

 

I think you about said it when it comes to Hardy. I made the same argument and was told that even though the teams, particularly Penn State, Iowa, and Purdue, two of whom finished in the Top-25 had bad D's so he really didn't do much. I'm sorry, but the guy was pretty impressive in every game he played. Even when he was double teamed and targeted in games, he managed to make plays that kept his team in games. He may have concentration issues, but I think that is something that is relatively easy to work out.

 

The same comments you made about Edwards are true as well. Again, I think that raw statistics don't matter quite as much as overall play. I do think that you can make some statements based on Edwards' stats as compared to many of the best QBs in history, taking other factors into account. From what I saw of Trent and the O last year, I saw a lot of room for improvement, but I wouldn't say that they completely sucked. I thought, based on a lot of factors that they improved. The statistics might not show it, but I thought that the team really began to get better as the season progressed. Everyone sees something different, but I'm with you on this. I think there are more reasons for hope than some other folks.

[krazykat]

I guess what I focused on is different from what you focused on -- how he actually played on a play-by-play basis for a rookie. He was often highly accurate, got rid of the ball quickly, and in general seemed to know what he was doing and have a ready command of the basics of how the offense functioned. He was also a rookie, and very inexperienced. As I'm guessing you did, I watched every game, usually twice. I also watched Cade McNown a lot his first year (not to mention JP), and in contrast to David Carr -- the proverbial sack machine -- he rarely put himself in a position where he was regularly pounded. I just don't see how statistically based arguments like this one can capture that. To my eye, he was remarkably better than the stiffs you listed above. It's not for nothing that most people who know something about QBing think he's going to be good. FWIW, Rich Gannon said that his debut against the Jets was the best performance he ever saw by a debuting rookie QB -- ever. And it's not as if they're buddies or anything like that.

 

p.s. While we disagree given that we prioritize different issues, I don't think there's really any need to be so snide and condescending. I watch a lot of football, and am quite familiar with the stats you cite above. I just don't place as much stock in them given that he was a rookie coming off a season ending injury in college who looked like he was in command of the offense. I'm sure that I'll get flamed for the "poise" argument, but I stand by what I said. I think that within a couple of years, he'll be a very efficient, upper echelon starting QB, a la Drew Brees -- another average-armed QB who struggled early on but who is intelligent and can process the NFL game quickly and intelligently.

Well, OK, and that's a different angle, so I'll jump in on apples-to-apples fashion here.

 

How can he be accurate when in five of 9 starts he threw for under 53.5%, often much less like in the Giants game?

 

I mean what you're saying is that the reason for the incompletes had nothing to do with him. OK. I disagree. Clearly not all were his fault, but a good many were.

 

I happened to notice that in the team's efforts to keep sacks down, he often overlooked some big play potential downfield in exchange for short, easy passes. I mean he had YPAs and YPCs better than only Cleo Lemon and Brady Coyle! This is good?

 

I'm also not snide and condescending and if you construe it that way I don't know what to say. But I'm a little astonished here at what passes for so called thoughtful analysis. If you want to just say that for no reason you expect Edwards to step up and play well, then fine, do it. But several here, with you just being the next in line, just keep slinging soft issue mud against the wall hoping it will stick, apparently. I don't recognize the tactic otherwise.

 

As to "in a couple of years," he doesn't have a couple of years. He has this season. He was hand-selected by Jauron and our personnel staff. If this flops, then get rid of the batch. He replaced Losman who was not good, but by the same measures that you and other praise Edwards, Losman probably had more solid "hopefuls." He did pitch what, something like 17 TDs and only 9 INTs the season prior, the first one in which he started. You talk about what was fair for Edwards, but was the way Losman has been treated fair? He got jockeyed in and out every season except for '06, and the team didn't have Lynch either, or Dockery or Walker, whom you praise too probably along with a better OL in '07 than '06. So we can definitely say that he did more with less, except in the book of those that don't want JP here, to succeed, or whatever.

 

Now, I'm gonna pick a game purely at random. Let's pick the one with the median Compl. %, OK? We'll use only his starts which means 9 games and a single median game, which is Philly unless I'm in error on the middle game. I'm gonna look up the play-by-play and we can analyze that game. I honestly do not know what to expect as I write this, but we'll see. Presumably you trust that.

 

Anyway, here are his drives in that game:

 

Here's the link:

 

http://www.nfl.com/liveupdate/gamecenter/2...HI_Gamebook.pdf

 

42-degrees in Philly, cloudy, moderate humidity, no rain/weather otherwise. Very nice football day, particularly for December, and in a game that the Bills were clearly trying to win to go .500, right. Good. There were no significant injuries on offense either.

 

The Bills basically had 9 drives in that game.

 

1st Drive:

 

The Bills get the ball at their 32 after the KO.

 

Looks like Edwards scrambled for 2 yards on the first play. Lynch then picks up a 1st down on a run. Edwards then throws a 4-yard pass to Royal before throwing incomplete to Parrish to force a punt.

 

OK, was that accurate? As I see it, the Bills drive ended on TE's inaccuracy.

 

2nd Drive:

 

Starting at our own 30 apparently the coaching staff had no confidence in TE whatsoever as we ran three times and out where we got stuffed on 3rd-and-1. (Lynch)

 

3rd Drive:

 

Edwards had two incompletions missing short to Evans and the deep to Evans on 3rd and 8. Naturally none of that was his fault. Presumably all of these passes are bouncing out of the hands and off the chests of all of our receivers like Evans and Parrish who haven't proven that they can catch yet in the NFL. Again, presumably.

 

4th Drive:

 

A decent drive for Edwards who basically thrived on short throws. The drive ended however in the red zone when Edwards threw a 2-yard pass on 3rd-and-4. Smart? A heads up play? Poised?

 

5th Drive:

 

In fairness to TE I don't count the drive (2 plays) to end the 1st H.

 

With great field position it's another decent TE drive again thriving on short passes, the biggest of which appears to have been a short outlet to Lynch who turned it into a bigger gain. 22 yards.

 

Can't blame TE for choking on 3rd and 16 in the red zone though. Tough situation for any QB. No praise either though.

 

6th Drive:

 

Down by 11 with the game still winnable, Edwards only two passes on this drive were short and incomplete. Again, can we assume that none of this had to do with him?

 

7th Drive:

 

This was another 3 and out with the coaching staff not letting TE throw it. Why not? I mean 2nd-and-2 are TE specialties in passing.

 

8th Drive:

 

4 of 5 incomplete on this drive. He did scramble for 10 on a broken play seemingly although that has little to do with what we're discussing.

 

9th Drive:

 

On this last drive with plenty of time to mount a drive and within a TD + a 2 pointer, Edwards hits on his first deep pass of the day to push the Bills to just past midfield before throwing 2 incompletes and then a pass for -7 yards to Jackson on a 3rd-and-10.

 

That was pretty much it. It is interesting to note that this was his 9th start and if anything, after a season's worth of experience he probably should have posted one of his better games, yet he didn't. No TDs, reallly only two drives worth mentioning yet even then not without their issues, and lots of incompletes on key passes as I see it.

 

Now you'll argue an say things like Evans went out with an injury just before the half and apparently didn't return, but I will defer to early in that game and other games where Evans being in there still didn't matter.

 

We can do this for every game if you like.

 

Either way, he finished 16 of 33 for 133 yards, a 4.0 YPA and an 8.3 YPC, and against a defense that really wasn't great. He finished with a rating of 65.0.

 

Now, I don't know how anyone can find much hope in games like that, and remember, there were at least four worse from a compl. % perspective and believe me, if we go thru some of the other four that were higher, we will find significant issues in at least two of those games as well.

 

So say what you want, defend TE as you'd like, but the facts speak louder than anyone's opinion on the matter as they always do. Just because you choose to override and ignore them is your business.

 

Either way, once again, someone else, put forth an argument that really has no basis.

[krazykat]

So from reading this post I can asses that according to you, college stats or performances don't transfer to the NFL unless the competition was at a higher level such as the SEC, just to use your example, am I right with this assessment?. The problem with that train of thought is that I'm pretty sure that our first round pick played close to or even lower level competition then Hardy, yet I haven't seen you bring that up. I haven't read every post in this thread word for word though so maybe I missed it.

 

James Hardy last year played against 4 teams that finished in the top 25 and he scored a TD in 3 of those games. Now I know you're going to bring up those teams weaker pass defenses but see those stats are skewed as well. Hell, Army had the 16th best pass defense last year and they won only 3 games.

 

I usually don't buy into stats that much but 36 TD's in 30 games can't be ignored at a Div 1 school.

 

As far as playing not so well against the higher competition lets have a look see at what he did before this last year, We've already established him having a TD in 3 of the 4 games involving a ranked team.

 

Last year he scored 4 TD's against Mich St., 3 against Iowa. In 2005 as a Freshman he scored 2 TD's against Wisc., Illinois and Mich st. Now while those teams may not be the cream of the crop in the NCAA they are some of the BEST teams he faced in those years. That's right, the only games he didn't score a TD in his Fresh and Soph. years were 1 game against Ohio st. as a Freshman and one as a Soph. against Mich. where he left the game early due to injury.

 

The kid has performed at maybe not the highest level of college competition but it's not like he is playing Kent every week.

 

Also as a side note the level of competition he has faced is equal to if not more then the talent he has around him. He had an okay counterpart at WR in Indiana but Andrew Means ain't the one drawing a double team. The rushing attack they had last year was less then admirable with Marcus Thigpen gaining a whopping 568 yards. Kellen Lewis ran the ball almost half as many times as he threw it and when he did throw it more then a third of his 3043 yards went to Hardy.

 

I guess the point I'm trying to make is this:

 

Every team Hardy and Indiana played knew he was the offense and they doubled and sometimes triple teamed him. Yet he was dominate, 36 td's in 30 games dominate. While I know this doesn't always translate to the NFL it is a sign of what he can do.

Which teams did Hardy/Indiana play that finished top 25? Let's start there.

[krazykat]

I think you about said it when it comes to Hardy. I made the same argument and was told that even though the teams, particularly Penn State, Iowa, and Purdue, two of whom finished in the Top-25 had bad D's so he really didn't do much. I'm sorry, but the guy was pretty impressive in every game he played. Even when he was double teamed and targeted in games, he managed to make plays that kept his team in games. He may have concentration issues, but I think that is something that is relatively easy to work out.

 

The same comments you made about Edwards are true as well. Again, I think that raw statistics don't matter quite as much as overall play. I do think that you can make some statements based on Edwards' stats as compared to many of the best QBs in history, taking other factors into account. From what I saw of Trent and the O last year, I saw a lot of room for improvement, but I wouldn't say that they completely sucked. I thought, based on a lot of factors that they improved. The statistics might not show it, but I thought that the team really began to get better as the season progressed. Everyone sees something different, but I'm with you on this. I think there are more reasons for hope than some other folks.

Well good, then I look forward to Hardy coming close to posting 1,000 yards this year.